lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
Those small annoying Canadian cats are always sneaking into our flower beds and causing trouble. :rolleyes::p

Seriously Fox News is purely entertainment and not news. It's funny to watch though in a sick twisted sort of way. Still Cspan is probably the closest to new we come. I mean they got a screamer(Hannity), a crazy man(Beck) and a narcissist(Oreilly) Shepard Smith is the coolest cat on the channel. But the rest I could do without. Although Beck is great entertainment I must admit.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Read the US Constitution and then come back to comment on what our government is supposed to be/do. Government can't be allowed to have too much power and it definitely should never be able to completely control what information is disseminated, unless it would compromise national security. That said, the ones who determine this last point need to be objective about it, not arbitrary. Look at the USSR, China and North Korea- they tell the people what they want them to read, see or hear. Remember Pravda? That's the Russian word for 'Truth'. How about Baghdad Bob? He's a classic and recent example. He was on camera, saying that death would come to the American infidels and that they were nowhere near Baghdad when they were right down the road from him at the time.
I'm not sure that your reply even addressed my point.:confused: I wasn't commenting on what the government does or does not do, should or should not do.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
I'm not sure that your reply even addressed my point.:confused: I wasn't commenting on what the government does or does not do, should or should not do.
If small government is right-wing and big gov't is left-wing, our government can't be seen as giving mainstream America what it wants, if your view that mainstream America is too far right is accurate. I also can't see how the median view can be right of center in light of the fact that Obama was elected POTUS.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I confess that I'm not aware of the details behind the tiff between FOX and the White House. If they are trying to filter what is being heard by the public, well that's wrong. However, when it comes to granting interviews to FOX, I'd be hestitant as well. The organization is beneath contempt.:rolleyes:

I've watched some of Bill O'Reilly's interviews (out of morbid curiosity, I suppose) and if the interviewee isn't to his liking, it turns into a demeaning berating of the poor b*****d, with no meaningful exchange of points or ideas. Disgraceful! I'd rather be interviewed by MAD magazine...
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
I confess that I'm not aware of the details behind the tiff between FOX and the White House. If they are trying to filter what is being heard by the public, well that's wrong. However, when it comes to granting interviews to FOX, I'd be hestitant as well. The organization is beneath contempt.:rolleyes:

I've watched some of Bill O'Reilly's interviews (out of morbid curiosity, I suppose) and if the interviewee isn't to his liking, it turns into a demeaning berating of the poor b*****d, with no meaningful exchange of points or ideas. Disgraceful! I'd rather be interviewed by MAD magazine...
I want The Onion to do an exclusive with Obama. That'll bring the facts to light, for sure!:D

The barking dogs are too annoying to even bother listening to, but occasionally, one of them will come up with something important.

I want news when I need information, not entertainment. Arguing and interrupting each other isn't news, it's annoying and a waste of time.
 
J

jamie2112

Banned
I love music..........NOT POLITICS.........BOOOOOOOOOOO











Oh yeah I like Turtles...........
 
gmichael

gmichael

Audioholic Spartan
I have yet to see any broadcast from any network that didn't get me yelling at the TV, Fox or otherwise. All of them tell just enough of the story to make it seem more sensational than it really is. They love to skew the truth to present a slanted story and get us to think their way. It's all a bunch of crap, but our founding fathers fought and died so that we could have the right to spew out all the crap we want. The government should not be allowed to regulate the news in any way shape or form. Bravo for shutting that down.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I also can't see how the median view can be right of center in light of the fact that Obama was elected POTUS.
That's because in most other countries, he wouldn't be viewed as being left-wing. I think he's fairly middle of the road. It comes down to pragmatism. Depending on the situation, the position/action a government takes should be whatever works. Such as health care. If greater government involvement results in cheaper, more accessible high quality care - why wouldn't it go that way?

When you let political views guide your every action, it's a path to grief. Let the situation dictate your actions, not whether it's "ideologically pure".

Our Prime Minister is widely viewed as being verrrry right wing. However, our government took part in the Auto company bailouts as well. It was a pragmatic decision. They'd rather hold their nose and give them billions, than to see tens of thousands of people thrown out of work.
 
M

markw

Audioholic Overlord
...Such as health care. If greater government involvement results in cheaper, more accessible high quality care - why wouldn't it go that way?
I hear ya, but unfortunately in this country with the collusion between big business and the government (both parties), these things always wind up costing the taxpayers more.

The rich always get richer and the taxpayers get squeezed.

As for Obama trying to shut Fox News out of the loop, doesn't this totally go against his campaign promise of transparancy in government?
 
Matt34

Matt34

Moderator
That's because in most other countries, he wouldn't be viewed as being left-wing. I think he's fairly middle of the road. It comes down to pragmatism. Depending on the situation, the position/action a government takes should be whatever works. Such as health care. If greater government involvement results in cheaper, more accessible high quality care - why wouldn't it go that way?

When you let political views guide your every action, it's a path to grief. Let the situation dictate your actions, not whether it's "ideologically pure".

Our Prime Minister is widely viewed as being verrrry right wing. However, our government took part in the Auto company bailouts as well. It was a pragmatic decision. They'd rather hold their nose and give them billions, than to see tens of thousands of people thrown out of work.

His ideals, associates and past voting record absolutely align him to the left when it comes to capitalism in the United States. Here's a dated article but still does a good job of describing his leftist views.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=78330
 
R

rnatalli

Audioholic Ninja
They all lie and they all think they have the best news reporting.
Isn't that the truth. I guess this is why I listen to NPR. They're feel pretty bland when you first listen to them, but then realize they're simply reporting and not adding anything. CNN I can't stand because they'll give you the same story for weeks straight and call everything breaking news. The BBC is much better than CNN and FOX IMO.
 
lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
That's because in most other countries, he wouldn't be viewed as being left-wing. I think he's fairly middle of the road. It comes down to pragmatism. Depending on the situation, the position/action a government takes should be whatever works. Such as health care. If greater government involvement results in cheaper, more accessible high quality care - why wouldn't it go that way?

When you let political views guide your every action, it's a path to grief. Let the situation dictate your actions, not whether it's "ideologically pure".

Our Prime Minister is widely viewed as being verrrry right wing. However, our government took part in the Auto company bailouts as well. It was a pragmatic decision. They'd rather hold their nose and give them billions, than to see tens of thousands of people thrown out of work.
I know first hand how crazy your Canadian governments can be. They aren't any different then the ones we have. ;)
 
S

stevo238

Banned
Maybe we should ask ourselves why The Obama administration is picking a fight with Fox News. Simple answer. Create a distraction and deflect attention from (amongst other things) the Health Care debate and to shore up their base. That base would be the Left wingers in their party.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Isn't that the truth. I guess this is why I listen to NPR. They're feel pretty bland when you first listen to them, but then realize they're simply reporting and not adding anything. CNN I can't stand because they'll give you the same story for weeks straight and call everything breaking news. The BBC is much better than CNN and FOX IMO.
I like PBS, BBC and yes, I even like our own CBC. It may be "owned" by the government, but they are the worst thorn in its side - no matter which party is in power.
 
Matt34

Matt34

Moderator
"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable."


Thomas Jefferson
Well, the WH press pool showed some sack--good for them. Even though I'm pretty sure they did this out of self preservation that any loyalty to the ideas of the free press. They figured that if they cut out FOX then they could cut one of them out.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/white-house-loses-bid-exclude-fox-news-pay-czar-interview/
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
That's because in most other countries, he wouldn't be viewed as being left-wing. I think he's fairly middle of the road. It comes down to pragmatism. Depending on the situation, the position/action a government takes should be whatever works. Such as health care. If greater government involvement results in cheaper, more accessible high quality care - why wouldn't it go that way?

When you let political views guide your every action, it's a path to grief. Let the situation dictate your actions, not whether it's "ideologically pure".

Our Prime Minister is widely viewed as being verrrry right wing. However, our government took part in the Auto company bailouts as well. It was a pragmatic decision. They'd rather hold their nose and give them billions, than to see tens of thousands of people thrown out of work.
The reason many countries would view Obama as middle of the road is due to so many countries shifting to the left. Socialization is spreading widely and if it becomes too extreme, it's not a good thing. I posted before that the middle needs to be stronger and I'll stand by that. I want a balance of government- not doing everything for us and not doing absolutely nothing because government has some duties that can't be eliminated, like protecting our borders, legislation (without going overboard), currency supply, etc. I also want people to take more responsibility in their lives and in some cases, just try once in a while. Try to do for themselves what they take as handouts. I see disabled people doing more than many able-bodied people because they won't accept the idea that "they can't". The ones who are perennial takers of handouts often believe "I can't" and because it's so easy to get what they need, they change their thought to "I won't".
 
Davemcc

Davemcc

Audioholic Spartan
Well, the WH press pool showed some sack--good for them. Even though I'm pretty sure they did this out of self preservation that any loyalty to the ideas of the free press. They figured that if they cut out FOX then they could cut one of them out.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/white-house-loses-bid-exclude-fox-news-pay-czar-interview/
Thanks for getting back to the original point. Fox's competitors will stand up for Fox because they recognize the potential 1st Amendment issues even if AH's own partisan hacks can't. It's no wonder I fear for the future of your democracy.
 
S

stevo238

Banned
The reason many countries would view Obama as middle of the road is due to so many countries shifting to the left. Socialization is spreading widely and if it becomes too extreme, it's not a good thing. I posted before that the middle needs to be stronger and I'll stand by that. I want a balance of government- not doing everything for us and not doing absolutely nothing because government has some duties that can't be eliminated, like protecting our borders, legislation (without going overboard), currency supply, etc. I also want people to take more responsibility in their lives and in some cases, just try once in a while. Try to do for themselves what they take as handouts. I see disabled people doing more than many able-bodied people because they won't accept the idea that "they can't". The ones who are perennial takers of handouts often believe "I can't" and because it's so easy to get what they need, they change their thought to "I won't".
I by and large agree with what you said about personal responsibility. As far as so many countries shifting to the left, I would say that the fairly recent elections in Germany and France have shown a move to the center with regard to the 2 leaders of those countries. Gordon Brown's popularity in G. Britain is at a low point. I've even heard the Russians warn us against moving too far left. If anybody knows about socialism gone wrong it's them. You can lump Great Britain into that also. They figured it out in the 70's that it was no panacea. What scares me and should scare us all is government getting control of the economy. That's why you should fear single payer Health Care.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
I by and large agree with what you said about personal responsibility. As far as so many countries shifting to the left, I would say that the fairly recent elections in Germany and France have shown a move to the center with regard to the 2 leaders of those countries. Gordon Brown's popularity in G. Britain is at a low point. I've even heard the Russians warn us against moving too far left. If anybody knows about socialism gone wrong it's them. You can lump Great Britain into that also. They figured it out in the 70's that it was no panacea. What scares me and should scare us all is government getting control of the economy. That's why you should fear single payer Health Care.
I fear our government and most of its goals. This is the first time I have felt this way, too. I'm old enough to have had "duck and cover" drills in grade school, starting in first grade. I remember the Principal rolling a TV into our classroom when Kennedy was shot, although I don't remember the Bay of Pigs happening, although my dad and I went to the south side of MKE to see Kennedy when he was here just before going back to Dallas, where he was killed. I remember how shocked the country was by this, and how we used to have a national identity, with goals as a nation. I remember watching the astronauts landing on the Moon (we got our first color TV that evening), I remember the riots, seeing a lot of coverage about the Cold War, Viet Nam, the DNC in Chicago and I remember how little it took to shock people to their core. I remember people who didn't have much but they were proud to have what they did because they worked for it. Now, everyone wants a freebie. They want to win the lottery and if they had the guts to think about how much they pizzed away on Lotto tickets, they could probably have paid for college.

People don't really care about anyone but themselves. They talk about doing things for others, they watched Live Aid (probably more to do with seeing their favorite rock stars and thinking it was cool to do what they told them than actually doing something for someone else), they donate money and food, they take little online quizzes so they can think they count but they don't do much for others that takes a lot of effort or is inconvenient. They hop on bandwagons because they think they agree but have no idea what they're agreeing with. They have no qualms with killing people in school because they were bullied, they think being in a gang, thug life, dealing/doing drugs are cool or they want to be the next big rapper/rock star/athlete/person of the week/reality show star. They think school has nothing for them and go on to lead a life of ignorance, dependence and poverty. That's all bullshyte. Giving things or money can help if the administration of it doesn't hoover up most of the money or take credit for it when all they did was push paper and pencils around on a desk. People think the world owes them, for some reason. They're offended when someone tells the truth. They somehow think it's OK to force the majority to change their ways to those of the "offended" minority in issues like religion, politics, health, etc. Nobody who is accused of a crime has any reason to worry about the full penalty unless everyone in town watched them do it, it's on video and they're recorded confessing after being Mirandized. Even then, their lawyer will probably tell the jury that the whole thing is all a misunderstanding and whatever they said has been taken out of context. Some members of the media think it's OK to draw a diagram in the sand, to show where our troops are, in relation to the enemy (Geraldo Rivera), tell military secrets "on condition of anonymity" or sell scientific, government or military info to other countries for some money.

In the words of Bart Simpson, "I didn't think it was possible but this both blows and sucks".
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top